The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the second respondent, who received a lump-sum amount for alimony and withdrawal of claims, rendering further prosecution unnecessary.
The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.407 of 2010 against the accused are hereby quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
CRL.P. NO.5759 of 2011
DATE: 12.08.2011
BETWEEN:
Kommineni Satish Kumar and others
Petitioners/accused
And State of A.P. Rep.by Public Prosecutor and another
.. Respondents/complainant
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
CRL.P. NO.5759 of 2011
ORDER:
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.407 of 2010 on the file of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate cum Mahila Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 384, 406 and 506 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
3. The petitioners/accused and the second respondent-defacto complainant are present. They have stated that on the intervention of the elders, they compromised the matter and an amount of Rs.8,00,000/-(Rupees eight lakhs only) as mentioned in para 5 of the criminal petition was paid to the second respondent-Kommineni Naga Swapna towards permanent alimony and settlement of all claims. The second respondent admitted before the Court that she received the said amount and also stated that the quash proceedings can be allowed and she is no longer interested to prosecute the case. Further, in view of the compromise, if the criminal proceedings are allowed to be continued before the trial Court, no useful purpose will be served and there is no possibility for the prosecution to secure a
conviction since the complainant and witnesses will not support the prosecution case. Thus, if the case is kept pending, it will cause much hardship and inconvenience to the parties and it also amounts to abuse of process of Court.
4. For the reasons aforementioned and in view of the compromise between the parties, the above proceedings before the trial Court against the accused are hereby quashed.
5. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
___________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J
Date: 12.08.2011 kvrm
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
CRL.P. NO.5759 of 2011
DATE: 12.08.2011
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC can be quashed upon settlement and payment of compensation.
Whether continued prosecution becomes an abuse of process of court in light of the parties' compromise.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Kommineni Satish Kumar
State of A.P.
Kommineni Naga Swapna
R. KANTHA RAO
R. KANTHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
